Publication

This paper argues that the dynamics of chronic conflict in Afghanistan have been poorly understood, specifically in terms of its effect on human livelihoods. The authors show that there is little evidence for consistent livelihood understanding and analysis-informing humanitarian practice in Afghanistan, and that aid practice has been driven by simplified stories reinforced through short-term humanitarian based programming that emphasizes delivery and pay little attention to learning. They use case studies of opium production, an economic blockade in Hazarajat, and carpet production in northern Afghanistan to illustrate the complexity of livelihoods and the dynamics of power relations. The paper concludes with key lessons from these studies.